Apple gained two favorable court decisions in its patent battles with Google's Motorola subsidiary today, one in Germany and other at the U.S. International Trade Commission.

Guilty verdict against Google in Germany halts its Motorola case against Apple

In the German case, as outlined by patent law expert Florian Mueller of FOSS Patents, Judge Andreas Voss issued a stay requested by Apple, suspending the case pending the results of an ongoing antitrust investigation by the European Commission examining Google's use of Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) against Apple.

Google's use of SEP, particularly its threats to leverage those patents to gain injunctions against Apple's sales if its onerous demands for licensing royalties were not met, has turned the patent dispute into an antitrust investigation.

Google has sought to use the patents it acquired with Motorola Mobility to win extraordinary royalty claims against both Microsoft and Apple, related to products making use of H.264 video codecs, WiFi 802.11 wireless networking, and even 2G GPRS mobile data.

Apple and Microsoft have both argued that Google's demands are neither Fair, Reasonable nor NonDiscriminatory, with Apple noting in particular that Google was asking for 12 times the usual royalty rate.

Patent abuse by Google and Samsung related to SEPs (which are committed to licensing on FRAND terms) sparked an investigation by the EC last year, and this summer the group handed down a preliminary antitrust ruling finding Google guilty, similar to an earlier guilty finding against Samsung.

ITC denies Google a rehearing over Apple's patent claims

Motorola got a second setback today when the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a motion by Motorola Mobility for a rehearing of a decision favorable to Apple.

Back in October 2010, Motorola Mobility had sought to impose an ITC import ban against Apple, resulting reciprocal legal action by Apple. Claims on both sides were dismissed by judge Richard Posner in June 2012.

Judge Posner has described patents (at least in the smartphone industry) as being, in his opinion, unworthy of protection by the courts, an example of America's patent-related lawsuits being a crapshoot where the outcome may be based simply upon the arbitrary feeling of the particular justice ruling that day.

However, a favorable appeal won by Apple in August reasserted two Apple patents at issue in the ITC's ongoing investigation. Today's decision blocks Google's request to rehear that decision.

"This is very significant progress for Apple in its patent enforcement efforts against the Google subsidiary and the wider Android ecosystem," Mueller wrote."This is very significant progress for Apple in its patent enforcement efforts against the Google subsidiary and the wider Android ecosystem" - Florian Mueller

Apple's original case involved three patents. The appeals court reprimanded the ITC and reversed its decision on two of the original patents in question:

Mueller further noted, "the two patents that Apple revived on appeal are multi-touch patents that have previously been asserted, then withdrawn, but could be reasserted anytime against Samsung."

The two patents join a series of others Apple is strategically using to stop what it has regularly referred to as the "slavish" copying of its product inventions and designs, including the so-called "Steve Jobs patent" that was challenged at the US Patent and Trademark Office only to be fully reaffirmed in a form stronger than it was prior to the reexamination in mid October.

Samsung case continues next week

In parallel, the initial Apple v. Samsung litigation in the Northern District of California will continue next week, with a retrial hearing to clarify the state of $400 million of the initial $1 billion settlement Apple won against Samsung last fall related to patent infringement.

A jury will decide whether to award more, less or an equal amount of damages to Apple related to the $400 million portion of the original awarded disputed by Samsung over confusion and flawed responses by the original jury related to their damage award.

Apple presented a simplified jury verdict form that Judge Lucy Koh approved on Tuesday. She also rejected Samsung's efforts to create a more complex and potentially confusing breakdown that would make it easier to again re-challenge whatever the jury decided.

"Samsung has been unsuccessful so far with its attempts to muddy the water for the new jury," Mueller wrote, outlining a series of attempts the company has made to add layers of complexity to the jury verdict form.

The "Story" will GRoW when import bans and changes to Andriod Come and they will .....

If you haven't noticed both SamScum and Giggles see the writing on the wall, I.e. Crome and SamScum - POS Tizan!

Apple isn't required to license multi-touch. they will either make it very expensive or deny all requests to license. If so, the competition will all begin to look more like old Blackberry phones then anything else.

w00t w00t

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge

Companies choose to commit patents to standards. There isn't a standard that requires multitouch that Apple participated in and pledged its patents towards with FRAND terms. No one is going to force them to in the US at least. It will be interesting to see how successful these patents will be.

Apple isn't required to license multi-touch. they will either make it very expensive or deny all requests to license. If so, the competition will all begin to look more like old Blackberry phones then anything else.

w00t w00t

I do not want that.

First of all I do not see vanilla Android as a copy. It's a clear and different alternative now, at least for everyone with at least one active brain cell. I can afford a smartphone only because of Google. A billion people will relate to this.

Honestly, I hope Apple loses big time and the fact that you want all devices to become blackberries again just shows how limited most posters are.

Would you be happy if Apple had more 50 billion on the bank to feed shareholders that don't even know what Apple does, how they think, what is their goal? Is there anything that Apple isn't doing because they do not have enough money? Did Google behave bad because of Android? No.

Android is here to stay and have 80% Market share worldwide. It was a great move and it is a fantastic product. The only thing wrong with it are OEMs like Samsung. No one is saying that iOS and the iPhone aren't the best.

First of all I do not see vanilla Android as a copy. It's a clear and different alternative now, at least for everyone with at least one active brain cell. I can afford a smartphone only because of Google. A billion people will relate to this.

Honestly, I hope Apple loses big time and the fact that you want all devices to become blackberries again just shows how limited most posters are.

Would you be happy if Apple had more 50 billion on the bank to feed shareholders that don't even know what Apple does, how they think, what is their goal? Is there anything that Apple isn't doing because they do not have enough money? Did Google behave bad because of Android? No.

Android is here to stay and have 80% Market share worldwide. It was a great move and it is a fantastic product. The only thing wrong with it are OEMs like Samsung. No one is saying that iOS and the iPhone aren't the best.

What a bunch.... Deal with it.

Have fun with your Android phone when it only responds to a single touch, just like when it was first released in the US.

Although HTC, Nokia and others have licenses to the patents so your Android future may be TouchWiz free.

Anonymous parties tried to get these patents voided, now they are back, stronger than ever after several reexaminations and appeals.

Meanwhile I wonder how Oracle's appeals are coming along, Google is preparing by dumping their Java clone Dalvik in favour of ART, maybe not running Android in a VM will finally remove the inherent lag that devotees always deny.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.

My business partner recently switched from an iPhone 3GS to a Samesong Galaxy 4S because it was cheaper (really not by much, but she has Windows and Android loving friends who she is swayed by) and had a slightly bigger screen, plus better predictive text options. Of course, when she calls me the mic in her phone is clearly rubbish as her voice is really badly captured compared to the old iP3GS. She's also lost the ability to see my Photostream and the photos aren't as good as those from my iPhone 5. And I haven't even looked at it for more than five minutes.

I tried using her phone, and there are so many features that work precisely how the iPhone works you can see why:

some people buy them (it's basically an iPhone, but cheaper) and

Apple is suing them.

I hope Samesung gets totally clobbered. It isn't like they don't have talented engineers, it's just their business ethics that stink. Or lack of them. As for Google, don't they have a motto about not doing this kind of thing?

Google stole Apple's ideas. Period. The iPhone was the first multitouch device and had an intuitive user interface. Apple did this and Google copied. These cases have proven that. It's Google's problem for stealing ideas and then giving them away to everyone, diminishing Apple's market share. I hope they are required to pay royalties for every infringing device on the market.

Samung gonna recoup those costs with the ipad mini retina. Not a story

If it were no big deal Scamsung would've just paid the original billion US$ and moved on. This goes to their way of doing business. They typically "look at an item" and then improve upon it and sell it then the next guy does the same thing. China, Taiwan, and many other asian countries work with this ethic. Work ethic my ASS! Bunch of thieves.

Have fun with your Android phone when it only responds to a single touch, just like when it was first released in the US.

Although HTC, Nokia and others have licenses to the patents so your Android future may be TouchWiz free.

Anonymous parties tried to get these patents voided, now they are back, stronger than ever after several reexaminations and appeals.

Meanwhile I wonder how Oracle's appeals are coming along, Google is preparing by dumping their Java clone Dalvik in favour of ART, maybe not running Android in a VM will finally remove the inherent lag that devotees always deny.

Carefull.

Is Android slower than iOS on similar hardware? Of course, only a retard would ignore that.

Are current highend or midend Android devices (when not running touchwiz or to a less extent LG's skin) slow? Of course not, only a ignorant person would say that. You are showing how ignorant you are about the matter, so please educate yourself or shut up about it.

Will Android become even better when Dalvik is dumped in favor of ART? yes!

I do not want an Android future. I want a great phone with iOS without 40 to 60% margins or, if Apple feels that they have a right to charge more because their device is by far the best (as the 5s certainly is), I want a bigger screen for a variaty of reasons that make sense only for anyone that isn't interested in defending corporations with 40% margins and 160 billion standing still.

But Android is a fantastic alternative. Lower quality? yes. In a lot of cases, like mine, a better deal? Hell yeah.

My future is always touchwiz free, just like with everyone that cares, even when buying samsung phones.

Quote:

Originally Posted by poke

Yes!

Let's look at Google's strategy:

1. Blatantly copy another company's product

2. Give it away for free in order to destroy the market for companies that might exclude Google services from their phones

3. Slowly make it proprietary piece by piece in order to control partners once they're dependent on it

#1 was bad, but common. #2 was a nasty, cynical move, remiscent of the tactics that almost got Microosft broken up. #3 is just evil.

1. Copy? Proof, or shut up about it. Educate yourself. Android is as much as a copy of iOS just like Aperture is a copy of photoshop. Guess what... Inspired? Yes. Copy? No way. Samsung?yes, they copied but Google has nothing to do with it.

And there's nothing you can do to prove your point, even with android 1.6. Do you know why? Because it is a lie. But even if it was, we are now on 4.0+.

2. Amazing strategy, just like Apple and Mavericks. What is Apple's strenght? Great hardware and Software together = unique product. Focus on that, not on software alone. Microsoft is scared.

What is Google's strenght? Services. Give the plataform and perfect it for your services. Everyone but Apple is scared. Fantastic strategy by both companies, even if a little diferent.

3. And Google is trying to eliminate the difference. Most OEMs can't keep up on the software part, and Google does what is best for them and costumers. OEMs are pawns, irrelevant companies. Apple proved that. Microsoft proved that. Google proves that.

Basically Googledid terrific business decisions and is the only company that can keep up with Apple. Both ecosystems benefit a lot. Devs could try and ignore iOS for years, but not Android + iOS world. Of course, Google is benefiting from drag race a lot more than Apple.

Terrific companies, Google provided the best deal for me.

130 € s3 mini Vs 350 € 4s on the same circunstances. Is touchwiz terrible? I think so, but not cyanogenmod+crossbreader. Android is a fantastic plataform that will keep 80 % Market share for years and years. Everybody wins. Me, you, Apple, Google. OEMs and RIM or Microsoft, on the other hand.... and that's great.

My business partner recently switched from an iPhone 3GS to a Samesong Galaxy 4S because it was cheaper (really not by much, but she has Windows and Android loving friends who she is swayed by) and had a slightly bigger screen, plus better predictive text options. Of course, when she calls me the mic in her phone is clearly rubbish as her voice is really badly captured compared to the old iP3GS. She's also lost the ability to see my Photostream and the photos aren't as good as those from my iPhone 5. And I haven't even looked at it for more than five minutes.

I tried using her phone, and there are so many features that work precisely how the iPhone works you can see why:

some people buy them (it's basically an iPhone, but cheaper) and

Apple is suing them.

I hope Samesung gets totally clobbered. It isn't like they don't have talented engineers, it's just their business ethics that stink. Or lack of them. As for Google, don't they have a motto about not doing this kind of thing?

Do you have any cognitive problem?

Google has nothing to do with that. Use AOSP or any Nexus. That's an entirely Samsung decision. The s4 is crap.I dare you to say the same about the HTC one.

Yes, you might say:

- I like iOS more;

- it's a little too big;

- iPhone is faster and simpler.

But you will treat the HTC as a phone as worthy as the iPhone (or close), not a "cheaper iPhone".

If it were no big deal Scamsung would've just paid the original billion US$ and moved on. This goes to their way of doing business. They typically "look at an item" and then improve upon it and sell it then the next guy does the same thing. China, Taiwan, and many other asian countries work with this ethic. Work ethic my ASS! Bunch of thieves.

Samesung don't improve anything - they reduce the quality of every component (while looking on paper like the spec is the same) so they can cut the price; then Google come along and copy the software and you end up with an inferior product. Apple should have seen the need for a wider size range though.

Google stole Apple's ideas. Period. The iPhone was the first multitouch device and had an intuitive user interface. Apple did this and Google copied. These cases have proven that. It's Google's problem for stealing ideas and then giving them away to everyone, diminishing Apple's market share. I hope they are required to pay royalties for every infringing device on the market.

That's an ignorant statement.

Google built an amazing alternative based on the iPhone. Google did not copy Apple just like Apple did not copy adobe with aperture or google docs with the new web iWork.

And even if Google copied Apple icon to icon, feature to feature, what is your problem? Apple isn't a person. Google isn't a person. Both have billions of dollars and one brings the best in the other.

In fact I believe (and evidence, logic and courts back me up) that:

a) Android isn't a copy.

b) Android is fantastic, even if iOS is just better;

c) Google did the right thing for a variaty of reasons. Could you imagine if Google was forced out of iOS without Android as an alternative?

My only true problem:

Why isn't Apple doing the same on the search engine business? WTF is wrong with them? They have more talent than Google (the only company that has more talent than google), but way less corage...

First of all I do not see vanilla Android as a copy. It's a clear and different alternative now, at least for everyone with at least one active brain cell. I can afford a smartphone only because of Google. A billion people will relate to this.

Honestly, I hope Apple loses big time and the fact that you want all devices to become blackberries again just shows how limited most posters are.

Would you be happy if Apple had more 50 billion on the bank to feed shareholders that don't even know what Apple does, how they think, what is their goal? Is there anything that Apple isn't doing because they do not have enough money? Did Google behave bad because of Android? No.

Android is here to stay and have 80% Market share worldwide. It was a great move and it is a fantastic product. The only thing wrong with it are OEMs like Samsung. No one is saying that iOS and the iPhone aren't the best.

What a bunch.... Deal with it.

Will it not be the Courts that decide if Google has done anything wrong? Further, you can't afford a zero dollars down phone? That is how little I can get an iPhone 5C for.

With that said, here is the main problem with the thrust of your statements. If I spend a hundred million dollars developing a product and figuring out how it will best work, I want to 1) recoup my investment, 2) make a nice profit, and 3) create a market for my product. Once my product is released, it costs a lot less for a competitor to manufacturer my product. It does not have to do nearly the same amount of research thereby saving millions of dollars. This in turn allows it to bring a product to market for less than my own. That is essentially what Google has done. It took without permission Java and used IOS as a model to build its own product. More importantly, Google has a history of just taking innovative ideas and pushing out small competitors. That type of behaviour kills innovations. Eventually people like you who like cool products, will not have them because who wants to spend big dollars to develop a product to just allow your competitors to being it to market cheaper by copying you? Moreover, Apple's approach is more inclusive. With its iPhone it did not elect to build the entirety of its services, it included Yahoo, Google, Microsoft, Nuance, Tom Tom, Yelp, Facebook, and the list goes on. Google instead, just takes the concepts those other companies have developed and tries to copy the products.

Moreover, iOS is more than just the way it looks. It is also the way it behaves. Patents cover both.

Anyone can see they copied the ideas behind the iPhone. Exact copy? No, however some manufacturers have made their offerings very similar to Apple. Take a look at nearly every camera app on an Android device. They almost all look like Apple's. Cue the "but that's the only way to do a camera app" argument. Sure, because Apple had invented the "ideal". Rubber banding and multitouch... patents that were stolen and proven to be. This is not an ignorant statement. I watched the 2007 keynote, purchased the original iPhone and I watched as Google released their offering in late 2008. Copied.

The fact is that Apple has asserted that Google stole something, proved that they have and the courts have validated that. It doesn't have to do with copying, it has to do with stealing. Apple has INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY on unique user interaction with a device and they want to assert ownership of that property which they have the right to do legally. It doesn't matter what you think about it. Of course you think it's wrong... your free operating system on cheap hardware is going to suck more.

Hmm, tell me, how much is the most RAM the HTC can have? I actually prefer it to the Samesungs, but their spec is lower than it needs to be despite how nice they look.

I believe that it is 2gb and it has a s600. Sine the UI is nicely done and the phone itself is faster than any samsung phone ever produced (the note 3 lags. Everything with touchwiz lags) I fail to see your point, especiallyin a forum about Apple (the a7 is just a beast).

Quote:

Originally Posted by SwissMac2

Do you have Aspergers Syndrome? You're just so needlessly rude.

Calling someone ignorant or liar when they are being ignorant or liars is not rude, it's honesty.

I mentioned the cognitive problem becauser the poster basically said: I don't like bananas so I eat bananas. It didn't make sense. How's that rude?

Quote:

Originally Posted by TBell

1.Will it not be the Courts that decide if Google has done anything wrong? 2. Further, you can't afford a zero dollars down phone? That is how little I can get an iPhone 5C for.

3.With that said, here is the main problem with the thrust of your statements. If I spend a hundred million dollars developing a product and figuring out how it will best work, I want to 1) recoup my investment, 2) make a nice profit, and 3) create a market for my product. Once my product is released, it costs a lot less for a competitor to manufacturer my product. It does not have to do nearly the same amount of research thereby saving millions of dollars. This in turn allows it to bring a product to market for less than my own. That is essentially what Google has done. It took without permission Java and used IOS as a model to build its own product. More importantly, Google has a history of just taking innovative ideas and pushing out small competitors. That type of behaviour kills innovations. Eventually people like you who like cool products, will not have them because who wants to spend big dollars to develop a product to just allow your competitors to being it to market cheaper by copying you? Moreover, Apple's approach is more inclusive. With its iPhone it did not elect to build the entirety of its services, it included Yahoo, Google, Microsoft, Nuance, Tom Tom, Yelp, Facebook, and the list goes on. Google instead, just takes the concepts those other companies have developed and tries to copy the products.

Moreover, iOS is more than just the way it looks. It is also the way it behaves. Patents cover both.

1. No court saw Google as guilty, no one sued google because of it, no Nexus or any phone running AOSP is a copy of an iPhone. That is enough!

2. The 5c costs 600 € without a contract, That's how it is done in most contries. I pay 7.5€ each month for unlimited sms, calls and 300 mb data. PAYG

you guys have no notion of reality. My choice was 130 € for a s3 mini, 270 for an iPhone 4 or 350 (now, then it was 400) for a 4s (all of this on a vodafone promo). 80% of those living in Portugal earn less than 600 €/month.

3. Who are you to decide that? Google did not used java without permission (me and courts agree. If they had anything on Google, it was minor infractions) and they saw how great the iPhone was. So they build their alternative. Fantastic and LEGAL move.

Yes, in the begining it cost less, but it took years to perfect and to this day it had side-effects. But it is an extremelly capable plataform (only surpassed by iOS) and it paid off.

Then everything you wrote is wrong or is a lie. Google saw browsers, so they built the best browser. Google saw search engines, they built the best. etc etc. There is no product that beats a mature Google offering (besides something that is made by Apple, but that has a price). That's true competition. If other's can't compete, they die, and it is fantastic. Thank god RIM is dead, Nokia is dead, Moto was bought, etc. Now we have true competition,others stopped innovation.

You keep vomiting that google "copies" but every piece of evidence and comom sense shows that you are wrong. And to finish it off:

Apple is more inclusive? Use every color you want, as long as it is black. What about Apple store? iTunes store? Browser? Mail client? iMessage? Please, rest. You are wrong on every point you tried to make on your entire post. I showed why and gave evidence.

Google stole Apple's ideas. Period. The iPhone was the first multitouch device and had an intuitive user interface. Apple did this and Google copied. These cases have proven that. It's Google's problem for stealing ideas and then giving them away to everyone, diminishing Apple's market share. I hope they are required to pay royalties for every infringing device on the market.

Agreed. That would be sweet.

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

Google built an amazing alternative based on the iPhone. Google did not copy Apple just like Apple did not copy adobe with aperture or google docs with the new web iWork.

And even if Google copied Apple icon to icon, feature to feature, what is your problem? Apple isn't a person. Google isn't a person. Both have billions of dollars and one brings the best in the other.

In fact I believe (and evidence, logic and courts back me up) that:

a) Android isn't a copy.

b) Android is fantastic, even if iOS is just better;

c) Google did the right thing for a variaty of reasons. Could you imagine if Google was forced out of iOS without Android as an alternative?

My only true problem:

Why isn't Apple doing the same on the search engine business? WTF is wrong with them? They have more talent than Google (the only company that has more talent than google), but way less corage...

Except under the law Apple and Google are people, and the Courts have ruled against Android. I also can image a world without Android: it would be glorious. That is not necessary. It just needs to be stripped of the features created by others. But if it was gone, Microsoft makes a better phone OS.

You also highlight the difference between Google, Microsoft, and Apple. Apple has never found it necessary to copy everybody else's business. Google and Microsoft make fine search engines. Why does Apple need to enter that market? It would take years for Apple to accumulate the data necessary to make a competing product.